Talking about getting ahead of ourselves, I see Pat Cash thinks Andy will definitely win a slam this year - possibly this one.

Don't know about you guys, but when all the former champs used to confidently predict that Andy would definitely win a slam one day, I always felt like saying 'SHUT UP ! you'll jinx it. ' At least they turned out to be right.

I'm not an ex-pro tennis player, but even I predicted Andy would win a Slam.

In fact, I'm going to really stick my neck out and say he's going to win more... many more!

It's a myth that you have to be good at a sport to be able to understand it/analyse it/whatever. Some of the best coaches in the world in some sports never played the game at a professional level. You can see what a player is doing wrong/strengths/weaknesses/whatever without having been good enough yourself. Just because you weren't born with the same natural talent doesn't mean you don't know the game.

Really gets my goat when people bring up that nonsense. One member did on the Dimitrov thread. Utterly irrelevant.

(Not having a go at you Linda, just something you touched upon in your post!)

It's a myth that you have to be good at a sport to be able to understand it/analyse it/whatever. Some of the best coaches in the world in some sports never played the game at a professional level. You can see what a player is doing wrong/strengths/weaknesses/whatever without having been good enough yourself. Just because you weren't born with the same natural talent doesn't mean you don't know the game.

Really gets my goat when people bring up that nonsense. One member did on the Dimitrov thread. Utterly irrelevant.

(Not having a go at you Linda, just something you touched upon in your post!)

Unsure what you mean, and probably now irrelevant, but most importantly: I know you're not having a go at me.

Reminds me of the first time my (pre)hubbster took me to see a Dons (AFC) match in the Richard Donald Stand. Our seats were upper-mid-section, and I was able to see the whole 'game' like a big canvas beneath me.He was mightily impressed by how I was able to point out strategy.Then we shared a greasy Pittodrie pie and Bovril. That sealed the deal right there.

I know what you mean. I guess it's when they use the 'definitely' word it seems a bit ott. There are many world class sportsmen who, despite their obvious ability, never won their sport's top prize. Of course, when all's said and done, it's only punditry - which provides great chat fodder for folk like us.

I have to be honest here. There were moments when I was preparing myself for the possibility that, despite his undeniable talent, and my admiration of his game, Andy may not win a slam. Although, unlike some, I could never consider his career to be anything other than successful. I'm glad it's academic now.

Unsure what you mean, and probably now irrelevant, but most importantly: I know you're not having a go at me.

Reminds me of the first time my (pre)hubbster took me to see a Dons (AFC) match in the Richard Donald Stand. Our seats were upper-mid-section, and I was able to see the whole 'game' like a big canvas beneath me.He was mightily impressed by how I was able to point out strategy.Then we shared a greasy Pittodrie pie and Bovril. That sealed the deal right there.

Things like that.

Some of the best analysts, pundits and coaches were pretty crap at the sport or never even played it. When people laugh down others for pointing things out, questioning what their job is and if they've ever won a Slam, etc it's downright ignorant and quire frankly irrelevant. Even your average armchair fan can be quite knowledgable about tactics, strategy and players' games, strengths and weaknesses. It's a myth that those who played the game professionally are always right and those who didn't know nothing.

Thinking more football than tennis, but there are plenty of ex-players who played at the top of game who were spectacular failures as managers, whilst many who played the game to an even lower level than someone like me go on to becomes great managers. The current Southampton manager who gained back-to-back promotions used to be a physio after playing in the lower leagues, whilst a physio with no experience in the game whatsoever took over from John Barnes to steer Tranmere to safety (they were rock bottom under Barnes). In summary, you don't need to have been a pro to be able to analyse a sport, although having played the sport at some point in your life would obviously help (not essential though - see Tranmere physio). Going back to tennis I dare say many journalists who watch the sport week in, out would make far better pundits than the likes of Andrew Castle.

Anyway, you touched upon a sore point of mine and I shall shut up now. Moving on..

Delighted with the draw, sure Andy could have got an easier opening match but it's great to have avoided Berdych in the quarters (as well as having been a problematic opponent in the past he'll be on a high after Davis Cup). Delpo is usually a straight forward match for Andy as he can't live with Andy's superior mobility and variety. It's Murray or Djokovic for me with Berdych as the best outside bet.

@ TMH, but surely someone like Lendl or Tony Loche (spelling?), would get more respect, and therefore what he said would carry more weight, than x who wasn't very good. Especially at Andy's level? I also feel that someone like Andy would be more prepared to take Lendl's advice than x's too.However, I do agree that being a gr8 player doesn't necessarily make you a gr8 coach. Imagine Connors...

I actually think this is quite a good draw all things considered. Not only will Haase give Murray a reasonable (but most likely not too troubling) test early on to get him up and running but he has also avoided all his bogey men such as Berdych (whom I know he beat a couple times last year to square up the H2H but I still never fully fancy this match up), Roanic and other such volatile big-hitters. Furthermore he doesn't meet Djoker til the final at which point it will be anybody's game, with the parachute payment of the points a final loss would give compared to a semi defeat. Murray has an excellent H2H with Del P and Simon to boot. Slight amendment to the draw though:

I think we should take a look at Djokos challengges enroute to the final, though its hard to imagine him being beaten. More chance that Federer will be beaten, but he is very likely to make the SF. I'll take a look at their draws later.

bbh - isn't it Roche? Or are we thinking of different people?Either way I agree with the point. A number of comms have said that Lendl isn't saying anything that new to Andy about being more aggressive but because of who he is Andy is now finally listening and acting. But the fact that Andy chose someone like Mr L shows he knew that this is what he needed ie someone he couldn't ignore. So all credit to Andy for taking that leap, which might have felt quite scary given how he has liked to control his team.